MAKING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN SRI LANKA SUSTAINABLE

THROUGH BUILDING REGULATIONS

P.H.P. Senadheera1), K.A. Gunasekara2), B.A.K.S. Perera 3)
kasunamali@yahoo.com 2)
Department of Quantity Surveying, University of Vocational Technology, Sri Lanka
Department of Building Economics, University of Moratuwa, Sri Lanka

ABSTRACT
Sustainable construction can have a significant influence on the economy of a country as well as
on the social wellbeing of its public, as it ensures the quality of buildings including their health
and safety aspects, structural stability and energy efficiency. Construction work thus has to be
properly regulated and monitored. In Sri Lanka, regulations specifically meant for sustainable
buildings have still not been made available. Therefore, the aim of this research was to enhance
the sustainability of residential buildings in Sri Lanka through building regulations. The research
used a qualitative approach to achieve the research objectives. Manual content analysis was
used to analyse the findings. Seventeen factors that are used in Sri Lanka to measure
sustainability were identified. Absence of encouragement from the government and political
issue;, technical issues; poor knowledge of the clients; financial issues; insufficient support
received from the management; social and cultural aspects unique to Sri Lanka; and drawbacks
of the Sri Lankan education system were found to have a negatively effect on ensuring
sustainability of the buildings constructed in the country. Finally, several recommendations were
made to improve the sustainability of residential buildings , such as developing awareness in
the relevant parties about sustainable construction, reviewing government policies, seeking
advice from sustainability experts, educating clients on sustainability aspects, preparing o
sustainability measurement tools, training of staff on sustainability aspects, enforcing rules to
ensure sustainability, developing a culture of respect and emphasizing the need to change.
Key words: Building Regulations, Plan Approval Process, Residential Buildings, Sustainability

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Construction industry has been hesitant to accept sustainable strategies, mainly because of the
high cost of green applications and the lack of encouragement from customers (Wao et al., 2016).
Hill and Bowen (1997) have stated that sustainable construction begins before construction is
commenced (in the planning and design stages) and that it continues even after the construction
team has left the site. According to Athapaththu and Karunasena (2018), in Sri Lanka, the
construction industry is not yet equipped for sustainable construction. Alternative sustainable
proposals are also not encouraged in the Sri Lankan construction industry (Kosala and
Karunasena, 2015).

It is widely believed that sustainable buildings are more comfortable than conventional buildings
(SGS Economics and Planning Pvt. Ltd, 2008). Wilhelm (2005) found that sustainable buildings
provide a pool of financial, social and environmental benefits. The cost savings that come with
the efficient use of energy and resources and increased occupant satisfaction are two of these
benefits. However, designing a sustainable building is a challenge (WBDG Sustainable
Committee, 2011). There have to be building regulations in place to ensure the sustainability of
the building (Berkovics, 2010), i.e., to ensure that it is structurally stable and capable of ensuring
the health and safety of the public who use it (Everall, 2015).

Page 1 of 18
The permit required to construct a residential building can be obtained through the building plan
approval process (Housing and Building Control Act UK, 1984). According to Wilkinson (2014),
once the permit is obtained, there is no hindrance whatsoever to change the built environment as
and when required.

Although there have been studies on sustainability in construction, there have been only very few
studies on using building regulations to ensure sustainability in residential buildings constructed
in developing countries , particularly in a country like Sri Lanka. This research fills this
literature gap and identifies the need for a building regulation process in Sri Lanka that ensures
sustainability of the buildings. The aim of the research was, therefore, to enhance the
sustainability of residential buildings in Sri Lanka through building regulations. The objectives of
the research were to identify sustainable construction principles, to identify the sustainability
measurement factors suitable for residential buildings in Sri Lanka, to identify negative features
of the plan approval process followed in Sri Lanka, and to propose solutions to enhance the
sustainability in residential buildings.

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1.Sustainability

According to the University of Alberta (2016), “sustainability is the process of living within the
limits of available physical, natural and social resources in ways that allow the living systems in
which humans are embedded to thrive in perpetuity”. Developing countries pay special attention
to make sustainability an operative criterion in their development activities (Abidin, 2010).
Moreover, many governments, businesses, organizations, and individuals have accepted the need
to consider the environment during sustainable development (Oforia, 2003).

2.2.Sustainability in the Construction Industry

Mohamed and Hana (2010) have pinpointed that sustainable construction promotes the
achievement of goals associated with economic sustainability, environmental sustainability and
social sustainability. On the other hand, Rwelamila et al. (2000) have identified social, economic
and environmental parameters as the three pillars of sustainability in the construction industry.

Buildings have a large impact on the global climate change and are responsible for solid waste
generation, external and internal pollution and other environmental issues (Zimmermann,
Althaus, & Haas, 2005). Moreover, Jayantha and Man (2013) and Dimoudi et. al. (2008) have
stated that during manufacturing and transporting of building materials, large amounts of
greenhouse gases (GHG) are emitted. According to Natural Resources Canada (2006) and Wang
et. al. (2005), in Canada, residential and commercial buildings consume about 30 % of the total
secondary energy used and are responsible for nearly 29 % of CO 2 equivalent greenhouse gas
emissions. Sustainable building construction has now become a new trend (Kubba, 2012).

Sustainable building construction offers an opportunity to build environmentally efficient

buildings that reduce the harmful impacts of buildings on the environment and occupants (Ali et
al., 2009 cited Hikmat et al., 2009). Sustainable buildings interact with the built, natural and
social systems and therefore, comprise complex and different priorities that require consideration
at each stage of a building’s life cycle (Mateus and Braganca, 2011).

Page 2 of 18
John et al. (2005) have identified five objectives of constructing sustainable buildings: resource
efficiency, energy efficiency (including greenhouse gas emission reduction), pollution avoidance
(including indoor air quality and noise reduction), harmonization with the environment and
integrated and systemic approach settings.

Tan et al. (2011) have documented the important role the contractors have to play to encourage
sustainable development within the construction industry by taking up the responsibility to
diminish the harmful effects of construction on the environment and society while maximizing
economic benefits through sustainable construction. Table 1 presents the sustainable construction
principles that have to be followed by an organization (as identified from the literature).

Table 1: Sustainable Construction Principles

1. Complying with the legal framework of the country when pursuing sustainable
construction and taking up environmental and social responsibility to improve
economic development (Pitt et al., 2009; Tan et al., 2011)
2. Having one’s own sustainable standards, guidelines or policies to minimize
environmental, economic and social risks associated with construction practices
(Krigsvoll et al., 2010)
3. Improving a project’s whole life value through green designs and ensuring its
buildability with the efficient use of resources and sustainable materials; minimum
wastage; and resilient, adaptable and attractive practices (Tan et al., 2011;
Gharzeldeena and Beheiry, 2015)
4. Promoting a green supply chain throughout a project’s life cycle to ensure
sustainability (Tan et al., 2011; Shaharudin and Ismail, 2015)
5. Increasing the sustainability of both the construction processes and their resultant
assets via sustainable technologies, processes and innovations, which include lean
principles (Tan et al., 2011; Booth et al., 2012; Liang et al., 2014)
6. Arranging the project structure to facilitate the implementation of sustainable
policies and strategies while increasing the organization’s awareness and
commitment to sustainable construction (Tan et al., 2011; Liang et al., 2014)
7. Increasing the commitment to sustainable construction through better education and
training of every staff member (Tan et al., 2011; Liang et al., 2014)
8. Having a measurement and reporting system or using existing benchmarks to evaluate
environmental, economic and social performances and identify areas that need to be
improved ( Pitt et al., 2009; Tan et al., 2011; Liang et al., 2014)

According to Geelani et al. (2012), one major challenge faced in constructing sustainable
buildings is their high initial cost. In Sri Lanka, sustainable buildings are 20 - 25% more costly
than conventional buildings (Jayalath, 2010). For example, the construction cost of the Thurulie
green factory building in Sri Lanka had been 30% higher than that of a conventional factory
building (Holcim Foundation for Sustainable Construction, 2009 as cited by Waidyasekara and
Fernando, 2013). There is a common misconception among the general public that the
construction of sustainable buildings is a somewhat difficult task for middle or lower class people
because of their high cost (Azizi et al., 2015). Lack of awareness (Djokoto et al., 2014);
resistance to change with change always considered as a challenge (CEC, 2008); lack of
professional knowledge (Abidin et al., 2012; Ametepey et al., 2015); scarcity of professional
knowledge which lengthens the sustainable building development time frame (Choi, 2009);
inexperienced or untrained workforce (CEC, 2008); technical issues ; and lack of
environmentally sustainable materials, demonstrations and technology (Ametepey et al., 2015)
Page 3 of 18
are some of the barriers to sustainable construction. According to past studies, the
implementation of the sustainable building concept can be very difficult when there is no support
forthcoming from the managements of the organizations.

In Sri Lanka, construction industry is governed by the Central Environmental Authority, the
Environmental Council as well as District Environmental Agencies , which have all been
established under the National Environmental Act of 1980 (National Environmental Act, 1980).
The Green Building Council of Sri Lanka (GBCSL) is the main body that promotes sustainable
buildings in the country (GBCSL, 2015). Ratnasiri (2012) has recognized the drivers of
sustainable building construction in Sri Lanka under three main categories (Figure 1).

Regulations and Goverment regulations and polices

encouragements Goverment/ Non-goverment
encouragement

Stakeholder Clients'/ Tenants' demand

DRIVERS
support Contractors' support

Ecology/ Social Environment sustainability

responsibility
Social responsibility

Figure 1: Drivers of Sustainable Building Construction in Sri Lanka (Ratnasiri, 2012)

‘Heritance Kandalama’, a hotel in Sri Lanka, is the first green hotel in the world to receive the
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification (Seneviratne, 2014). The
other modern and innovative green constructions in Sri Lanka are ‘MAS Thurulie factory’ at
Thulhiriya (MAS Holdings, 2015) and ‘Brandix Casual Wear Ltd.’ in Seeduwa.

2.3.Sustainability Measurement Factors

The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System was
developed by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC), which is a national non-profit
body, to rate new and existing commercial, institutional and residential buildings according to
their environmental attributes and sustainable measurement factors (Kat, 2003). The European
Committee on Standardization (CEN) set up the Technical Committee (TC) 350 in 2005 to
develop standards for ensuring the sustainability of construction works by developing voluntary
horizontal standardization of methods for the measurement of the sustainability features of new
and current construction works and values for the environmental product declarations (EPD) of
construction products. The Sustainable Building (SB) Tool Method is the upshot of the
collaborative work of several countries, begun in 1996 and promoted by the International
Initiative for a Sustainable Built Environment (IISBE). Table 2 presents 15 sustainability
measurement factors identified in the past studies based on the commonly accepted life-cycle
assessment (LCA) methods used in building sustainability measurement systems of some
countries. . Each of these factors has been identified by more than one researcher.

Page 4 of 18
Table 2: Sustainability Measurement Factors Identified by Past Researchers
Researchers
Sustainability measurement factors
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N
Sustainable sites         
Energy and atmosphere    
Indoor environmental quality      
CO2 emissions   
Transport    
Grey water management 
Reuse      
Lighting and day lighting    
Water efficiency   
Materials and resources     
Flexibility      
Construction quality   
Accessibility     
Construction waste     
Adaptability      
A - (Richard, 2008), B – (US Department of Energy, 2015), C - (Crawley et al., 2009), D -
(Mallawaarachchi et al., 2012), E – (Pearce et al., 2012), F – (Ahn. C. et al. (2010), G - (Reschke, 2014), H -
(Russell and Moffatt, 2001), I – (Alrubaih et al., 2013), J - (Pinheiro, 2006), K - Kincaid (2002), L –
(Ellison and Sayce, 2007), M - (Aziz & Hafez, 2013), N - (Silva & Vithana, 2008)

2.4.Building Regulations

Building regulation is a routine task of building control bodies (Knight, 2015, p 9). Regulations
and standards are a dominant part of building control (Baiche et al., 2006). King (2016)
emphasizes that building control regulations need to cover areas, such as public health; building
pathology; energy conservation and sustainability; fire safety; and building accessibility. Under
building control, access to houses and their facilities and their security measures are also
inspected (Conlon, 2016). Mitchell (2014) and Field (1990) have categorized building regulations
under three Ss, namely structure, services and sustainability.

Past studies indicate that current regulations would have become ineffective due their inability to
tackle the gap between the performance standards included in the approved documents and the
standards actually followed in practice (Lowe and Bell, 2000) and the differences in the practice
and regulations of the building control processes, due to disagreements that occur among
approved inspectors and local authority inspectors (Baiche et al., 2006). The failure on the part of
the approved inspectors and local authority inspectors to handle their workloads can also highly
affect the effectiveness of a building control process (Baiche et al., 2006). Small local authorities
are unable to manage and handle the building control process effectively and the quality of their
inspections is poor (Visscher and Meijer, 2008).

The process that is being followed in Sri Lanka for approving plans by either the Urban
Development Authority (UDA) or local authorities (LAs) was identified through the document
review. The process commences with the applicant obtaining from the relevant authority,
preliminary planning clearance for the building construction. This clearance obtained has to be
then submitted to the UDA / LA. If the documents comply with the relevant standards, approval
for them will be granted. The design of the building certified by a professional (town planner/
architect/ engineer) will then have to be forwarded for the planning committee approval. Next

Page 5 of 18
step will be for the technical officer and/or public health inspector to study the application and
other documents submitted. If the documents comply with the relevant rules and regulations, the
commissioner/public health inspector/planning officer/ technical officer of the UDA/LA will
recommend granting approval to them. The final decision on approving or rejecting the building
design will be taken by the planning committee comprising a town planner, an engineer, an
architect, an urban commissioner, a member from the relevant LA or UDA. If the plan is
approved, the next step will be to get the building permit from the UDA/LA. The process will be
complete when the Certificate of Conformity (COC) is issued by the UDA/LA.

2.5.Need for Building Regulations that will ensure the Sustainability of Residential
Buildings

Although there have been studies on the sustainability aspects of buildings, none of these studies
have explored the need for building regulations in Sri Lanka that can enhance the sustainability of
residential buildings constructed in the country, which is a research gap. One such past study is
by Pedro et al. (2010), who have discovered similarities and differences among different
countries in their building control regulatory frameworks, applications, plan approving processes
and site inspections at the completion of the building. There is, thus, a need for regulations that
will enhance the sustainability of buildings and professionalism in the building control process
followed in Sri Lanka, which needs addressing (Waidyasekara and Sandamali, 2012).

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Creswell (2014) recommends adopting the qualitative approach for a research when the variables
to be explored are unknown or when the literature is not comprehensive enough. This study,
therefore, used that approach and Figure 2 shows the steps that were followed to collect data and
analyse them; and achieve the objectives of the study.

An integral part of a research is the critical reviewing of literature, which is vital for creating and
fine-tuning research goals (Saunders et al., 2009). A comprehensive literature survey was,
therefore, first carried out in the study to learn about the concept of building regulations. The
document review that followed it was done mainly by referring to documents published by the
UDA and the local authorities about their building approval processes.

Page 6 of 18
 Introduction
 Background  Research problem
 Aim and objectives  Research methodology

Literature review on the Concept of Sustainability

principles and Sustainability Measurement Factors

Research Methodology
Objectives  Research approach  Research
1, 2, and 3 methods
partially

Data Collection Objectives

 Interviews 3 and 4
 Document
review

Data Analysis
 Interviews

Conclusion and Recommendations

Figure 2: Research Process

The document review was followed by 16 semi-structured interviews conducted based on an

interview guideline that was developed using the findings of the literature survey and document
review. Purposive sampling was used to select the 16 experts who were interviewed. They all had
exposure to the plan approval process of the existing building regulations and were selected from
among those working in the industry. Each interview, which was conducted face to face, lasted
for around 45 - 60 minutes and Table 3 presents the profiles of the interviewees. Interview
findings were analyzed using manual content analysis.

Table 3: Details of the Interviewees

Length of
Interviewee Organizatio Organization experience in
Job title Job Designation
code n type the industry
in years
I 01 Charted Quantity Chairman Consultant Private 45
Surveyor
I 02 Charted Quantity Director Consultant Private 44
Surveyor
I 03 Charted Town Planner Project Manager Consultant Government 35
I 04 Charted Quantity Chairman & Consultant Private 33
Surveyor Managing Director
I 05 Charted Engineer Director Client Government 30
Engineering
Service
I 06 Charted Architect Chairman Consultant Private 27
I 07 Charted Town Planner Deputy Vice Client Government 25
Chancellor
I 08 Charted Town Planner Deputy Director Consultant Government 18
Planning
I 09 Charted Architect Senior Lecturer Client Government 15
I 10 Charted Quantity Actg. DGM Consultant Semi 15
Surveyor (Contracts & Government
Page 7 of 18
 Length of
Interviewee Organizatio Organization experience in
Job title Job Designation
code n type the industry
in years
Quantity
Surveying)
I 11 Charted Engineer Professor Consultant Government 14
I 12 Charted Architect Chairman Consultant Private 14
I 13 Charted Town Planner Planning officer Consultant Semi 10
Government
I 14 Charted Architect Lecturer Client Government 10
I 15 Charted Valuator Lecturer Client Government 10
I 16 Charted Town Planner Planning officer Consultant Semi 06
Government

4.0 RESEARCH FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Sustainability Measurement Factors Suitable for Residential Buildings

Table 4 presents in summary form the sustainability measurement factors that were identified
from both the literature and interviews, as being suitable for residential buildings in Sri Lanka.
The factors that were endorsed by the interviewees are marked with a “” and the factors have
been arranged in the descending order of the number of interviewees who endorsed them.

Table 4: Sustainability Measurement Factors Suitable for Residential Buildings in Sri Lanka
identified the measurement
No. of studies that have

Interviewee comments
factor (14)

Sustainability
measurement
factors
I 01

I 02

I 03

I 04

I 05

I 06

I 07

I 08

I 09

I 10

I 11

I 12

I 13

I 14

I 15

I 16
M01 Indoor environmental 6                
quality
M02 Lighting and day 4                
lighting
M03 Materials and 5                
resources
M04 Construction waste 5                
M05 Sustainable sites 9              ×  
M06 Flexibility 6               × 
M07 Construction quality 3              ×  
M08 Accessibility 5               × 
M09 Energy and 4               × ×
atmosphere
M10 CO2 emissions 3        ×       × 
M11 Water efficiency 3     ×         ×  
M12 Adaptability 6             × ×  
M13 Transport 4        ×     × × × 
M14 Grey water 1       × ×     ×  × 
management
M15 Reuse 6     ×        ×  × ×
M16 Solid waste - ×   × ×   × × × × × × × × 
generation
M17 Building orientation -  × × × × ×  × × × × × × × × ×

= Identified at the interviews

Page 8 of 18
The interviewees gave consideration to the use of domestic materials, impact of materials on the
economy and environment, recyclability of the materials, minimization of material usage,
minimization of material transportation distance and minimization of waste under the
sustainability measurement factor “material and resources”. It was revealed that no
preference is given to these factors when approving building plans. This indicates that building
regulations do not insist that these factors have to be met in constructing a building.

Use of sunlight, minimizing the use of machinery, use of renewable energy, climate of the
location of the proposed building, building orientation and wind direction were considered under
sustainability measurement factor “Energy and Day Lighting”. It was revealed during the
interviews that except the use of sunlight, the other five sub-factors are not given due
consideration when approving building plans. Thus, it appears that building regulations do not
consider these five factors as requirements essential to be met by sustainable buildings.

Under the sustainability measurement factor “water efficiency”, conservation of water, use of
alternative water sources and avoiding the risks of flooding are the sub-factors considered.
The interviewees agreed that building plans are not approved if the buildings concerned are
located in areas prone to flooding. This indicates that building regulations have a requirement for
buildings to be in areas that are not prone to flood risks. However, they were of the view that
conservation of water and use of alternative sources of water are not given consideration when
approving building plans. Thus, it is evident that the existing building regulations do not stipulate
that these requirements have to be met in a building.

The sustainability measurement factor “adaptability” indicates the ability of the building to meet
the changing demands of its occupants, which can be costly and environmentally damaging.

Flexibility indicates that the internal building layout or configuration can be changed according
to the requirements of the occupants.

Floor to ceiling height, availability of elevators and movability of internal walls are the sub-
factors of the sustainability measurement factor “adaptability”. The interviewees mentioned that
the first two sub-factors are given consideration when approving the building plans indicating that
the current building regulations have a requirement for them. However, the third sub-factor is not
required in the building regulations.

Solid waste generation and building orientation are the two new sustainability measurement
factors introduced by some of the interviewees who were of the view that these two factors are
not given due consideration when building plans are approved. This means that building
regulations do not mention them.

4.2 Negative Features of the Plan Approval Process followed in Sri Lanka

Smith et al. (2013) have evaluated the certification process followed in Australia with respect to
residential buildings. However, since that process may not be directly applicable in Sri Lanka,
information on the existing plan approval process (PAP) and its negative impacts were identified
through the interviews. Thereafter, the literature findings and interview findings were analyzed.
The interviewees were first requested to comment on the existing building plan approval process;

Page 9 of 18
parties involved; and rules and regulations. The summary of the literature and interview findings
are presented below in Table 5.

Table 5: Negative Impacts of the Plan Approval Process on Ensuring the Sustainability of
Residential Buildings
Steps Procedure Negative impacts
01 Commencement of the Obtain clearance from the relevant  Insufficient encouragement
process authorities. received from the
02 Submission of Submit the clearance report along with government and political
documents for the application. issues
preliminary clearance
03 Granting of the Grant approval if documents comply  Technical issues
Approval with the relevant requirements.
04 Submission to get the Get the design certified by
 Clients’ lack of knowledge
plan approved professionals.
05 Analysis of the Obtain reports from the relevant
 Financial issues
application and other government officials.
documents
 Insufficient support received
06 Approval ( by the UDA/ Grant approval if the documents from the management
local authority) comply with the relevant rules and
regulations.  Social and cultural
07 Approval/rejection by Provide the final decision by either differences unique to Sri
the Planning Committee approving or rejecting the application Lankans
(local authority/ UDA ) after considering the problems/issues
that have arisen.  Drawbacks of the Sri
08 Issuing of the building Get the building permit from the UDA/ Lankan education system
permit local authority.
09 Issuing of the Get the Certificate of Conformity
Certificate of (COC) from the UDA/ local authority.
Conformity(COC)

Sustainability related legislation and the commitment of the government to sustainable practices
are two driving factors of the sustainability concept. Since politicians in Sri Lanka do not
properly understand what is meant by sustainability, the introduction of legislation related to
sustainable policies is rather slow.

A fairly high proportion of the total building stock in the country comprises residential buildings.
Yet, the government has failed to pay attention to improve the sustainability of these residential
buildings. Therefore, the government institutions must conduct research to ascertain the level of
sustainability of the existing buildings, sustainability factors that can affect the sustainability of
the buildings, and how sustainability can be improved. UDA has now prepared a green building
manual for government buildings, which is a positive sign that indicates the concern the
government has on sustainability.
Lack of environmentally sustainable materials, lack of sustainability measurement tools, lack of
sustainable projects, lack of guidance on sustainability aspects, lack of technical capabilities and
shortage of labor are the barriers to implementing sustainable construction in Sri Lanka.
Therefore, construction professionals have to acquire knowledge about sustainable construction
principals. There should be sufficient guidance to designers on sustainability and they should
have easy access to technical information on sustainable constructions.

Most of the environmentally friendly sustainable materials used in Sri Lanka are imported. Hence
they contain large amounts of embodied energy. Since the cost of locally produced materials like
tiles is higher than the cost of imported materials, people prefer to buy lower priced imported
materials for construction.
Page 10 of 18
In Sri Lanka, only a few sustainable measurement tools are being used, such as the one developed
by the Green Building Council of Sri Lanka, a private body focusing on green building practices
and the full adoption of sustainability in construction. Currently, there are only a few sustainable
projects that are being implemented in the country.

Technology plays an important role in sustainable building construction as construction

equipment using advanced technology and requiring high amounts of energy are in demand
during the construction period. Although modern equipment consumes less energy than other
equipment, it takes a long time to get modern equipment. Therefore, the construction industry is
compelled to use outdated equipment which requires frequent repairs. Buildings that are in
occupation also use old equipment and it is unlikely that the building owners will replace the old
equipment with new equipment because of the high cost of the latter category and their
ignorance of the advantages of energy efficient buildings.

Lack of knowledge of the clients about sustainability is another problem faced when
implementing sustainability measures. This may be due to the reason that in Sri Lanka,
sustainability education is not part of the general education. Almost all the interviewees
mentioned this as the main cause for the difficulty experienced in convincing the relevant parties
on the need to change towards achieving sustainability.

Risks associated with long payback periods, profitability issues, high investment costs, disregard
of the life cycle costs, poor financial resources and additional financial costs have to be overcome
if sustainable construction is to be implemented.

Construction managers have to play a major role in the successful implementation of sustainable
construction. Since the managers in Sri Lanka have not received sufficient training on
sustainable construction and lack knowledge about it, they are hesitant to take decisions
pertaining to sustainable construction.

The research findings indicate that managers at shop floor level are the most influential and
committed sustainability leaders. Therefore, it is essential to enhance their commitment in order
to create a sustainability culture.

The interviewees emphasized that several social and cultural characteristics that are unique to
Sri Lankans obstruct the adoption of concepts such as sustainability. In Sri Lanka which is still a
developing country, the style of thinking of the people is different who from that of the people in
developed countries. Some of the interviewees, however, did not consider this behavioral
difference as a weak point. The general opinion of the interviewees was that there is a need to
understand the working culture of Sri Lanka before adopting an alien concept like sustainability
in construction.

Drawbacks of the Sri Lankan education system is a long-standing barrier to implementing

sustainability concepts, since the top-level managers with high academic qualifications who were
interviewed pointed out that Sri Lankans fail to survive in the industry as they do not work
systematically. The interviewees briefly expressed that employees with high academic
qualifications working at higher levels are not adequately qualified to carry out human resource
management as it had not been included in their academic studies.

Page 11 of 18
4.3 Solutions to enhance the sustainability in residential buildings

To achieve the fourth objective of the research, opinions of industry professionals who were keen
on making changes to existing building regulations enhance sustainability of the residential
buildings were sought. Table 6 presents a summary of these solutions to enhance the
sustainability in residential buildings by one or more interviewees.

Table 6: Solutions to Enhance the Sustainability in Residential Buildings

Interviewee endorsements
Proposed changes

I 07
I 01
I 02
I 03
I 04
I 05
I 06

I 08
I 09
I 10
I 11
I 12
I 13
I 14
I 15
I 16
01 Developing a culture of  ×              
respect
02 Reviewing government      ×     ×  ×   
policies.
03 Providing training  ×    ×   ×       
04 Consulting lean experts   ×  ×    ×      × 
05 Educating the clients     × ×   ×  ×     

06 Emphasizing the need to   ×  ×    ×    ×  × 

change
07 Preparing sustainability  ×    × ×    ×  ×  × 
measurement tools
08 Assigning rules      × × ×   ×  ×  × 
09 Facilitating awareness   ×  × ×   ×  ×    × 
about sustainable
construction

The presence of a culture of respect was considered as the main requirement for sustainable
construction. When there is a culture of respect, the people get more involved in their work,
resistance to change gets reduced and a self-propelling organization with continuous
improvement is created. Most of the interviewees believed that appreciation, rewards and
encouraging the employees to get involved in the key business processes of the organization will
help to create a culture of respect in the organization.

Government policies need to be reviewed in order to promote sustainable construction and

energy savings to make the built environment sustainable through building regulations that
promote sustainable principles. According to most of the interviewees, their organizations are
already applying some of the sustainability techniques in an ad hoc manner. It was revealed that
owing to lack of experts on sustainable construction, the training of employees has been rather
slow and that they were compelled to work without proper guidance. Sustainability adoption
should commence from the simplest sustainability tool and practiced properly. The interviewees
strongly emphasized that the physical health of employees of an organization is important to
develop a sustainability culture within the organization which then will be supported by the
highly engaged employees and leaders enthusiastic about sustainability.

With assistance from experts, the risks associated with change can be reduced as the experts can
properly guide the employees. Unfortunately, there is a lack of sustainability experts who have
got a proper understanding of the nature of the construction industry.

Page 12 of 18
By educating clients on the subject of sustainability can mitigate the barriers to sustainable
designs. Such education will increase the demand for sustainable construction and reduce the
prices of sustainable construction materials and techniques.

As the first step of the change process it is necessary to emphasize to the employees the need to
change. All the interviewees agreed that the most effective approach to convincing the
employees about the advantages of sustainable construction is by indicating to them the personal
benefits they will get from sustainable construction.

The application of internationally recognized sustainability measurement tools, such as

BREEAM, LEED and the star rating system will be very important for improving sustainability
in the construction projects in Sri Lanka. The rating systems engage a team of various
professionals comprising architects, developers, contractors, and stakeholders for achieving
environmentally, socially and economically sustainable goals.

Enforcing rules is one of the most preferred practices of the top managements of the
organizations in Sri Lanka, although literature is silent about it. The interviewees believed that
currently in Sri Lanka, sustainable behaviors on the part of employees are rare as the stress levels
of people are on the increase, society is undergoing rapid changes and high competition exists
among people to enhance their living standards making them self-centered. Therefore,
enforcement of rules is subjective as it depends on the nature of the employees involved and their
behaviors.

Developing awareness about sustainable construction among the relevant parties is very much
essential to the country. The university degree programs dealing with property, construction and
designs have to include sustainability education dealing with building regulations, sustainability
principles, sustainable design processes and sustainable development as then the designers will be
more concerned about sustainable development and construction. Practitioners of sustainable
construction will be in a position to obtain advice from consultants when they are not familiar
with energy efficiency and environmental sustainability.

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The aim of this research was to propose suitable actions to enhance the use of the existing
building regulation process that will enhance the sustainability of residential buildings in Sri
Lanka. In order to accomplish the research aim and objectives, the study focused on studying the
concept of sustainability, identifying the sustainability measurement factors relevant to each
sustainability criterion, reviewing plan approval process in Sri Lanka and identifying solutions
required in the building regulations enforced in Sri Lanka so that sustainability of residential
buildings could be enhanced. Qualitative approach was adapted in the study and semi-structured
interviews and a document review were mainly used to collect the required data. The most
experienced professionals in the construction industry were selected for interviewing to ensure
the reliability of the research findings. The data collected were subsequently analysed to arrive at
the conclusions. “Indoor environmental quality”, “Lighting and day lighting”, “Materials and
resources”, “Construction waste”, “Sustainable sites”, “Flexibility”, “Construction quality”,
“Accessibility”, “Energy and atmosphere”, “CO2 emissions”, “Water efficiency”, “Adaptability”,
“Transport”, “Grey water management” and “Reuse” are the sustainability measurement factors
that were identified through the literature review. “Solid waste generation” and “Building
orientation” are the new measurement factors introduced by some of the interviewees. The
Page 13 of 18
existing building regulations of Sri Lanka in relation to the plan approval process were reviewed
through the document review and expert interviews. The interviewees also identified the
negative features of the plan approval process that impact on the sustainability of the residential
buildings and the changes that could be made to the building regulations to enhance the
sustainability of the residential buildings in Sri Lanka. Sustainable buildings have environmental,
economic and social benefits. Furthermore, making a building sustainable is a cost-saving
mechanism as it saves the maintenance cost of the building throughout its life cycle although the
initial cost of the exercise can be high according to the literature.

Finally, developing a culture of respect, review of government policies, training of staff,

consulting lean experts, educating the clients, emphasizing the need to change, preparing
sustainability measurement tools, enforcing rules and developing awareness on sustainable
construction are recommended as solutions to enhance the sustainability of residential buildings
in Sri Lanka.

6.0 REFERENCES

1. Abidin, N.Z. (2010). Investigating the awareness and application of sustainable construction
concept by Malaysian developers. Habitat International, 34(4): 421-426.
2. Abidin, N.Z., Yusof, N. and Awang, H. (2012). A Foresight into Green Housing Industry in
Malaysia. World Academy of Science, Engineering And Technology: International
Journal of Environmental, Chemical, Ecological, Geological and Geophysical
Engineering, 6(7), 55-63.
3. Ahn, C.; Lee, S.; Peña-Mora, F.; and AbouRizk, S. (2010). Toward environmentally
sustainable construction processes: the US and Canada’s perspective on energy
consumption and GHG/CAP emissions. Sustainability, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 354-370.
4. Ali, H. & Al Nsairat, S. (2009). Developing a green building assessment tool for developing
countries – Case of Jordan. Building and Environment, 44(5), pp. 1053-1064.
5. Alrubaih, M. S., Zain, M. F. M., Alghoul, M. A., Ibrahim, N. L. N., Shameri, M. A. and
Elayeb, O. (2013). Research and development on aspects of daylighting fundamentals.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 21, 494- 505.
6. Ametepey, S.O., Gyadu-Asiedu, W. and Assah-Kissiedu, M., (2015). Sustainable
Construction Implementation in Ghana: Focusing on Awareness and Challenges. Civil and
Environmental Research, 7(2), 109-119.
7. Athapaththu, K. I. & Karunasena, G. (2018). Framework for sustainable construction
practices in Sri Lanka. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 8(1), 51-63.
8. Azizi, N.Z.M., Abidin, N.Z. and Raofuddin, A. (2015). Identification of Soft Cost Elements
in Green Projects: Exploring Experts’ Experience, in: Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 170, 18-26.
9. Aziz, R.F. and Hafez, S.M., 2013. Applying lean thinking in construction and performance
improvement. Alexandria Engineering Journal, 52(4), pp.679-695.
10. Baiche, B., Walliman, N., & Ogden, R. (2006). Compliance with building regulations in
England and Wales. Structural Survey, 24 (4), 279 – 299. Retrieved from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02630800610704427.
11. Berkovics, D. (2010). Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century
Business. Fiche de Lecture, Majeure Alternative Management, HEC Paris: Jouy-en-Josas,
France.

Page 14 of 18
12. Booth, C., Hammond, F., Lamond, J. and Proverbs, D. (2012). Solution for Climatic Change
Challenges in the Built Environment, Blackwell publishing.
13. Brynjarsdottir, H., Håkansson, M., Pierce, J., Baumer, E., DiSalvo, C. and Sengers, P. (2012).
May. Sustainably unpersuaded: how persuasion narrows our vision of sustainability.
In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp.
947-956). ACM.
14. CEN. CEN TC 350. (2005). Sustainability of construction work. Executive summary [web
page],http://www.cen.eu/CEN/sectors/Technica lCommitteesWorkshops/centechnicalcomm
ttees/Pages/PdfDisplay.aspx; [accessed 08 10].
15. CEN. prEN 15643-2 (2009). Sustainability of construction works e assessment of buildings e
part 2: framework for the assessment of environmental performance. Brussels: CEN.
16. Choi, C. (2009). Removing Market Barriers to Green Development: Principles and Action
Projects to Promote Widespread Adoption of Green Development Practices. Journal of
Sustainable Real Estate, 1(1), 107-138.
17. Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC), (2008). Green Building in North
America: Opportunities and Challenges [online]. Canada: CES Publications. Available
from: http://www3.cec.org/islandora/en/item/2335- green-building-in-north-america-
opportunities-and-challenges-en.pdf [Accessed 30 May 2015].
18. Conlon, M. (2016). Areas of influence: International initiatives designed to advance the
profession. RICS Building Control Journal, p.4.
19. Crawley, D., Pless, S., and Torcellini, P. (2009). Getting to Net Zero, National Renewable
Energy Laboratory Drury Crawley [online]. U.S: Department of Energy. Retrieved from
http://sullivanarchitect.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/08/NREL-Getting-to-Net-Zero.pdf.
20. Creswell, J. W. (2014) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (4 ed.). California: SAGE Publications, Inc. Retrieved from
file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/Creswell-ResearchDesign.pdf
21. De Silva, N. and Vithana, S.B.K.H., 2008. Use of PC elements for waste minimization in the
Sri Lankan construction industry. Structural Survey, 26(3), pp.188-198.
22. Dimoudi, A., & Tompa, C. (2008). Energy and environmental indicators related to
construction of office buildings. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 53, 86-95.
doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2008.09.008.
23. Djokoto, S.D., Dadzie, J. and Ohemeng-Ababio, E. (2014). Barriers to Sustainable
Construction in the Ghanaian Construction Industry: Consultants Perspectives. Journal of
Sustainable Development, 7(1), 134-143.
24. Ellison, L. and Sayce, S., 2007. Assessing sustainability in the existing commercial property
stock: Establishing sustainability criteria relevant for the commercial property investment
sector. Property Management, 25(3), pp.287-304.
25. Everall, P. (2015). Model Answers: The way that different councils are dealing with the
increasing squeeze on services, RICS Building Control Journal, 12-13.
26. Field, T. (1990) Building regulations in England and Wales – Current changes and future
trends. Structural Survey, 8 (4), 393 – 398. Retrieved from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000003230.
27. Geelani, S.M., Geelani, S.H., Bhat, S.J.A., Haq, S., Mir, N.A., Junaid, S. and Zafar, B.
(2012). Green Building Development for Sustainable Environment with Special Reference
to India. International Journal of Environment and Bioenergy, 4(2), 86-100.
28. Green Building Council Sri Lanka (GBCSL) (2015). Green Building Council Sri Lanka
[online]. Colombo, GBCSL. Available from: http://srilankagbc.org/ [Accessed 20 April
2015].

Page 15 of 18
29. Gharzeldeena, M.N. and Beheiry, S.M. (2015). “Investigating the use of green design
parameters in UAE construction projects”, International Journal of Sustainable
Engineering, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 93-101.
30. Hikmat HA, Saba FN. (2009). Developing a green building assessment tool for developing
countries e case of Jordan. Building and Environment; 44(5): 1053e64.
31. Hill, R.C. and Bowen, P.A. (1997). “Sustainable Construction: Principles and a Framework
for Attainment,” Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 223-239.
32. Holcim Foundation for Sustainable Construction. (2009). Clothing factory in Sri Lanka.
Switzerland: Holcim Foundation.
33. Housing and Building Control Act, (1984). UK
34. Jayalath, M. S. (2010). Build Green to Ensure Sustainability. In Proceeding of the Sri Lanka
Energy Managers Association Annual Sessions – 2010, Colombo 30 July 2010. Colombo:
SLEMA.
35. Jayantha, M. W., & Man, S. W. (2013). Effect of green labelling on residential property
price: Case study in Hong Kong. Journal of Facilities Management, 11(1), 31-51.
doi:10.1108/14725961311301457.
36. John, G., Clements-Croome, D. and Jeronimidis, G. (2005). “Sustainable building solutions: a
review of lessons from the natural world”, Building and Environment, Vol. 40, pp. 319-328.
37. Kats, G. (2003). Green building costs and financial benefits (p. 1). Boston, MA:
Massachusetts Technology Collaborative.
38. Kincaid, D. (2002), "Adapting buildings for changing uses", Guidelines for Change of Use
Refurbishment, Spon Press, London.
39. King, V. (2016). A more accessible part M: the implications of recent changes to Part M.
RICS Building Control Journal. P.7.
40. Knight, P. (2015). Future proof homes: The eco credentials of new hoses in Kent. RICS
Building Control Journal, p.9.
41. Kosala, R. G., & Karunasena, G. (2015). Value engineering practices and its impact to
construction industry. In Proceeding of The 4th World Construction Symposium 2015:
Sustainable Development in the Built Environment: Green Growth and Innovative
Directions (pp. 538-546).
42. Krigsvoll, G., Fumo, M. and Morbiducci, R. (2010), “National and international
standardization (international organisation for standardization and European committee for
standardization) relevant for sustainability in construction”, Sustainability, Vol. 2 No. 12,
pp. 3777-3791.
43. Kubba, S. (2012). Hand book of green building design and construction LEEDS BREEAM
and GREEN GLOBES. USA: Elsevier Inc. doi:10.1016/B978-1-85617-676-7.00014-2.
44. Liang, S.Y., Putuhena, F.J., Ling, L.P. and Baharun, A. (2014). “Towards implementation
and achievement of construction and environmental quality in the Malaysian construction
industry”, Malaysian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 99-114.
45. Lowe, R., & Bell, M. (2000). Building regulation and sustainable housing. Part 2: technical
issues. Structural Survey, 18(2), 77 – 88. Retrieved from:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02630800010330121.
46. Mallawaarachchi, B. H., De Silva, M. L., Rameezdeen, R., and Chandrathilaka, S. R. (2012).
Green building concept to facilitating high quality indoor environment for building
occupants in Sri Lanka. In: S. Senaratne and Y. Sandanayake (Eds.), Proceeding of World
Construction Conference 2012 – Global Challenges in Construction Industry, Colombo 30
June 2012. Colombo: University of Moratuwa, 237-244.

Page 16 of 18
47. MAS Holdings, (2015). Thurulie receives LEED platinum green building certification
[online]. Colombo, MAS Holdings, Available from: http://newsline.masholdings.com/
[Accessed 20 March 2015].
48. Mateus, R. and Bragança, L. (2011). “Sustainability assessment and rating of buildings:
Developing the methodology SBToolPT–H”, Building and Environment, Vol. 46, No.10,
pp. 1962-1971.
49. Mitchell, D. (2014). Part and parcel: A simplified set of building Regulations. RICS Building
control Journals, p. 6.
50. Mohamed, S., & Hana. (2010). Green buildings and sustainable construction in the United
Arab Emirates. Association of researchers in construction management, 5(2), 1397-1405.
Retrieved from http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/.../ar2010-1397-
1405_Salama_and_Hana.pdf.
51. National Environmental Act, No 47 of 1980, (1980). Colombo: Government Publication
Bureau.
52. Natural Resources Canada (2006). https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/publications/energy
53. Oforia, G. (2003). Frame works for analysing international construction. Construction
Management and Economics, 21(4), 379-391. doi:10.1080/0144619032000049746.
54. Pearce, J., Albritton, S., Grant, G., Steed, G. and Zelenika, I., 2012. A new model for
enabling innovation in appropriate technology for sustainable development. Sustainability:
Science, Practice and Policy, 8(2), pp.42-53
55. Pedro, J.B., Meijer, F. & Visscher, H. (2010). Building control systems of European Union
Countries. International Journal of Law in the Built Environment, 2 (1), 45 – 59. Retrieved
from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17561451011036513.
56. Pinheiro, M. D. (2006). Ambiente e Construção Sustentável. Instituto do Ambiente.
57. Pitt, M., Tucker, M., Riley, M. and Longden, J. (2009). “Towards sustainable construction:
promotion and best practices”, Construction Innovation, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 201-224.
58. Ratnasiri, J. (2012). Sustainable Development - Is Sri Lanka on the Right Path?. In
Proceeding of the Professor A.W. Mailvaganam Memorial Oration – 2012, Colombo 4
December 2012. Sri Lanka: Institute of Physics, 1-11. Reschke E. (2014). Grey water
systems- benefits, drawbacks and uses of grey water. (2014). Available from:
http://extension.ucdavis.edu/unit/green_building_and_sustainability/pdf/resources/gr
ywater.pdf [Accessed 15 Feb 2014].
59. Reschke E. (2014). Grey water systems- benefits, drawbacks and uses of grey water. (2014).
Available from: http://extension.ucdavis.edu/unit/green_building_and_sustainability/pdf/
resources/gr ywater.pdf [Accessed 15 Feb 2014].
60. Richard, E. Z. (2008). Element analysis of the green building process. US: Rochester institute
of technology.
61. Russell, P. and Moffatt, S. (2001). “Assessing buildings for adaptability: IEA Annex 31
energy-related environmental impact of buildings”, International Initiative for a
Sustainable Built Environment (iiSBE), available at:
http://annex31.wiwi.unikarlsruhe.de/pdf (accessed May 2013).
62. Rwelamila P.D., Talukhaba AA. Ngowi A.B. (2000). Project procurement systems in the
attainment of sustainable construction. Sustainable Development. 8(1): 39–50.
63. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students (5
ed.). England: Pearson Education Limited.
64. Seneviratne, M. (2014). Green buildings: A synergy with biodiversity [online]. Colombo, Sri
Lanka Business & Biodiversity Platform. Available from:
http://business-biodiversity.lk/sri-lankas-green-buildings-have-a-highercompletion-rate/
[Accessed 05 July 2015].
Page 17 of 18
65. SGS Economics and Planning Pty. Ltd. (2008). Building green: financial costs and benefits.
Urbecon Bulletin, 1-7.
66. Shaharudin, Y.I.Z. and Ismail, Z. (2015). “Measures to enhance the applications of eco labels
in construction industry”, International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering &
Technology, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 37-56.
67. Smith, J., Smith, B. and Mitchell, G. (2013). Review and analysis of the residential building
certification process in south east Queensland. Structural Survey, 31(1), pp.21-34.
68. Tan, Y., Shen, L. and Yao, H. (2011). “Sustainable construction practice and contractors’
competitiveness: a preliminary study”, Habitat International, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 225-230.
69. University of Alberta's (2016). https://www.su.ualberta.ca
70. Urban Development Authority Law, No 41 of 1978, Sri Lanka: State Printing Corporation.
71. Visscher, H. & Meijer, F. (2008). Proceedings of COBRA 2008: Building regulations from an
European perspective. The Construction and Building Research Conference of the Royal
Institution of Chartered Surveyors, RICS, London.
72. Waidyasekara, K.G.A.S. and Sandamali, R.L.N. (2012). Impact of Green Concept on
Business Objectives of an Organization. In Proceedings of the World Construction
Conference 2012 – Global Challenges in Construction Industry, Colombo 28-30 June 2012.
Colombo: CIOB, 364-374.
73. Waidyasekara, K.G.A.S. and Fernando, W.N.J.K. (2013). Benefits of adopting green concept
for construction of buildings in Sri Lanka.
74. Wang, W., Rivard, H., & Zmeureanu, R. (2005). An object-oriented framework for
simulation-based green building design optimization with genetic algorithms. Advanced
Engineering Informatics, 19, 5-23. doi: 10.1016/j.aei.2005.03.002.
75. WBDG Sustainable Committee, (2011), “Sustainable. Whole building design guide”,
available at:http://www.wbdg.org/design/sustainable.php (accessed 24 March 2013).
76. Wilhelm, D. M. (2005). Green building specifics: Costs, benefits and case Studies. United
States: U.S Green Building Council.
77. Wilkinson, S. (2014). Taking stock of emissions: the importance of assessing the uptake of
sustainability measures in buildings over time. RICS Building Surveying Journals. p.16.
78. Wao, J. O.,, Ries, R., Flood, I., & Kibert, C. (2016). Refocusing value engineering for
sustainable construction. In 52nd ASC Annual International Conference Proceedings (pp.
13-16).
79. Zimmermann, M. Althaus, H. J., & Haas, A. (2005). Benchmarks for sustainable construction
a contribution to develop a standard. Energy and Buildings, 37, 1147-1157. doi:
10.1016/j.enbuild.2005.06.017.
80. U.S. Department of Energy, (2015). Energy Efficiency Trends in Residential and Commercial
Buildings [Online]. US: Department of Energy. Retrieved
from:http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/publications/pdfs/corporate/
bt_stateindustry.pdf.

Page 18 of 18